[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8a4163ee-ac31-60fa-4b8b-f7677ec0fd46@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2021 19:57:24 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@...gle.com>
Cc: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] KVM: x86: Use kernel x86 cpuid utilities in KVM
selftests
On 08/07/21 19:21, Ricardo Koller wrote:
>> I also prefer the kvm-unit-tests implementation, for what it's worth...
>> Let's see what the code looks like?
> I'm not sure I understand the question. You mean: let's see how this
> looks using kvm-unit-tests headers? If that's the case I can work on a
> v3 using kvm-unit-tests.
Yes, exactly. Thanks!
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists